Cases 1 - 10 of 40
Tate v. Grubhub Inc.
as 1:2023cv15865
Plaintiff:
Jack Tate doing business as The Tin Pig, LLC and Jack Tate on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated doing business as The Tin Pig, LLC
Defendant:
Grubhub Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question
Davitashvili v. Grubhub Inc.
as 23-521
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Mariam Davitashvili, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Adam Bensimon, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Mia Sapienza and others
Defendant:
DoorDash Inc.
Defendant / Appellant:
Postmates Inc., Uber Technologies, Inc., in its own right and as parent of wholly owned subsidiary Uber Eats and Grubhub Inc., DBA Seamless
Amicus Curiae:
United States Chamber of Commerce
Davitashvili v. Grubhub Inc.
as 23-522
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Mariam Davitashvili, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Adam Bensimon, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Mia Sapienza and others
Defendant:
DoorDash Inc., Postmates Inc. and Uber Technologies, Inc., in its own right and as parent of wholly owned subsidiary Uber Eats
Defendant / Appellant:
Grubhub Inc., DBA Seamless
Amicus Curiae:
United States Chamber of Commerce
Denise Sznitko v. USDC-CALA
as 22-70266
Not Classified By Court:
In re: DENISE SZNITKO and GRUBHUB, INC.
Petitioner:
DENISE SZNITKO
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES
Grubhub Inc. v. Denise Sznitko
as 2:2022cv01676
Petitioner:
Grubhub Inc.
Respondent:
Denise Sznitko
Cause Of Action: 09 U.S.C. § 0009 Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award
Grubhub Inc. v. City of New York
as 1:2021cv10602
Plaintiff:
Grubhub Inc.
Defendant:
City of New York
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
DoorDash, Inc. et al v. City Of New York
as 1:2021cv07564
Plaintiff:
DoorDash, Inc., Grubhub Inc. and Portier, LLC
Defendant:
City Of New York
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Doordash, Inc. et al v. City and County of San Francisco
as 3:2021cv05502
Plaintiff:
Doordash, Inc. and GrubHub Inc.
Defendant:
San Francisco City and County and City and County of San Francisco
Amicus Curiae:
Chamber of Commerce of the United State of America and California Chamber of Commerce
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Constitutionality of State Statutes
Ryan v. Grubhub Inc. et al
as 1:2021cv04865
Defendant:
David Fisher, Keith Richman, Katrina Lake and others
Plaintiff:
John Ryan
Luftig v. Grubhub Inc. et al
as 1:2021cv04704
Defendant:
David Fisher, Keith Richman, Katrina Lake and others
Plaintiff:
Craig Luftig
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
